What Shane Tuck Does - 2012 Thread

[TOOs_Finest]

Not being smart...genuine question. Why does a Dockers supporter have so much interest in one particular Richmond player?

Yeah, a Fremantle supporter coming to our board to discuss a specific player, and with an obvious agenda. Never seen that before

 

[CamTinley]

Not being smart...genuine question. Why does a Dockers supporter have so much interest in one particular Richmond player?

I've answered this before. I study a wide range of issues but mostly religion and culture. When I look at any group whether it is a state, nation or sporting club there is a certain culture that pervades it.

I am a Fremantle supporter but Fremantle will never be be any good because it has a Catholic culture and that will be hard to get rid of. The other club with a Catholic culture is Melbourne. Look at the number of coaches and CEO's just seamlessly move between those two clubs.

A Catholic culture means jobs for the boys and you'll get looked after as long as your Catholic. That promotes laziness and reduces the talent you have to work with. Fremantle actually choose coaches, captains, CEO's, number one ticket holders and Presidents with a "major requirement" being that they are Catholic. (I'm not sure about Lyon to be honest)

Other clubs have a Protestant ethic like Hawthorn, West Coast, Geelong, Adelaide.

Richmond's culture is Pagan. That might sound ridiculous but that is how I see it.

The first thing a coach does is pick out a sacrifice to make to the football gods, the better the player the more they hope that the football gods will smile on them. Half the supporters are looking for a sacrifice as well. The attitude is ... if we sacrifice "Player X' then players A,B & C will improve.

For the current coach the sacrifice was Tuck. For your last coach it was Bowden.

The problem is it doesn't work and when a player like Tuck refuses to go along with the plan you can sense the agitation is causes.

It's very fortunate for Richmond that Tuck didn't just throw in the towel like a lot of others would have.

The thing is the culture of a club comes from the administration not the coach.

Why have I entered into the debate ? I just despise pagan attitudes. The positive is that these attitudes can be changed. Things are looking good for Richmond right now but do Richmond supporters (and for that matter Melbourne & Fremantle supporters) get a feeling that there is something not quite right with their clubs but can't put their finger on it ? I would be surprised if they didn't.

Just as a side issue. Norm Smith the coach of Melbourne, at the very end of his coaching career, actually told people that something seriously wrong with the club and they would never be any good again. He didn't know what it was but it's turned out to be true.

I would actually like Richmond to do well but like a couple of other clubs need to change their culture.

IMO

 

[TOOs_Finest]

I've answered this before. I study a wide range of issues but mostly religion and culture. When I look at any group whether it is a state, nation or sporting club there is a certain culture that pervades it.

I am a Fremantle supporter but Fremantle will never be be any good because it has a Catholic culture and that will be hard to get rid of. The other club with a Catholic culture is Melbourne. Look at the number of coaches and CEO's just seamlessly move between those two clubs.

A Catholic culture means jobs for the boys and you'll get looked after as long as your Catholic. That promotes laziness and reduces the talent you have to work with. Fremantle actually choose coaches, captains, CEO's, number one ticket holders and Presidents with a "major requirement" being that they are Catholic. (I'm not sure about Lyon to be honest)

Other clubs have a Protestant ethic like Hawthorn, West Coast, Geelong, Adelaide.

Richmond's culture is Pagan. That might sound ridiculous but that is how I see it.

The first thing a coach does is pick out a sacrifice to make to the football gods, the better the player the more they hope that the football gods will smile on them. Half the supporters are looking for a sacrifice as well. The attitude is ... if we sacrifice "Player X' then players A,B & C will improve.

For the current coach the sacrifice was Tuck. For your last coach it was Bowden.

The problem is it doesn't work and when a player like Tuck refuses to go along with the plan you can sense the agitation is causes.

It's very fortunate for Richmond that Tuck didn't just throw in the towel like a lot of others would have.

The thing is the culture of a club comes from the administration not the coach.

Why have I entered into the debate ? I just despise pagan attitudes. The positive is that these attitudes can be changed. Things are looking good for Richmond right now but do Richmond supporters (and for that matter Melbourne & Fremantle supporters) get a feeling that there is something not quite right with their clubs but can't put their finger on it ? I would be surprised if they didn't.

Just as a side issue. Norm Smith the coach of Melbourne, at the very end of his coaching career, actually told people that something seriously wrong with the club and they would never be any good again. He didn't know what it was but it's turned out to be true.

I would actually like Richmond to do well but like a couple of other clubs need to change their culture.

Oh, you forgot the 'IMO' part

Surely this should be taken to the Society, Religion & Politics board

 

[CamTinley]

Then don't quote me and refute facts to deflect and make your own practically unrelated point. Pretty damn simple.

My stats were for his total career vs 2012, you are the one who has conveniently brought in the 2011 crap.

Well for his whole career Tuck has either your best second best or third best tackler on your entire list. If you want to look at lack of defensive pressure Tuck seems to be a strange choice of player to make an example of.

These days you have 36 players in an area the size of a small soccer ground most of the time. Of course tackles are going to be up. Some games you get 100 ruck contests with about eight to ten players around each one.

 

[TOOs_Finest]

Well for his whole career Tuck has either your best second best or third best tackler on your entire list. If you want to look at lack of defensive pressure Tuck seems to be a strange choice of player to make an example of.

These days you have 36 players in an area the size of a small soccer ground most of the time. Of course tackles are going to be up. Some games you get 100 ruck contests with about eight to ten players around each one.

I assume you are completely confusing me with another poster.

At no point have I bagged Tuck or even questioned any part of his game, not even the defensive side of his game.

I simply stated some facts about his tackle count being up and the influence his direct opponents are having on matches, and applauded him. I then went on to even suggest that the tackle trend was evident in other players, and that I had no idea why he was played at Coburg for the majority of last year.

So stop attacking my posts which aren't even argumentative in the first place, I simply made an observation. You just sound like a troll.

Being the first, second or third best tackler doesn't mean shit, when comparing to other non tacklers. Our lack of defensive pressure all over the ground was obviously an issue for a long time. The decision was made to change that - again I introduce you to Ross Smith. If the match committee decided Tuck was in the "too old to teach new tricks" category, that's their prerogative, I don't care to be honest. I care more about the fact that he has been able to do what he has done this year, despite all that.

 

[tugga]

Oh, you forgot the 'IMO' part

Surely this should be taken to the Society, Religion & Politics board

No, I asked a question and got a detailed response. This topic is on it's 2nd thread which means around 1200 posts. It's been a good discussion point.
Thanks for the response CT. I don't necessarily agree with it, but thanks. I think club culture is what certain people make of it at the time. Geelong's culture 10 years ago was losing grand finals and being known as handbaggers. Fast forward and the culture is as strong as any club in the comp. I think culture rests with the leaders a club has at the time.

 

[rammbo]

I've answered this before. I study a wide range of issues but mostly religion and culture. When I look at any group whether it is a state, nation or sporting club there is a certain culture that pervades it.

I am a Fremantle supporter but Fremantle will never be be any good because it has a Catholic culture and that will be hard to get rid of. The other club with a Catholic culture is Melbourne. Look at the number of coaches and CEO's just seamlessly move between those two clubs.

A Catholic culture means jobs for the boys and you'll get looked after as long as your Catholic. That promotes laziness and reduces the talent you have to work with. Fremantle actually choose coaches, captains, CEO's, number one ticket holders and Presidents with a "major requirement" being that they are Catholic. (I'm not sure about Lyon to be honest)

Other clubs have a Protestant ethic like Hawthorn, West Coast, Geelong, Adelaide.

Richmond's culture is Pagan. That might sound ridiculous but that is how I see it.

The first thing a coach does is pick out a sacrifice to make to the football gods, the better the player the more they hope that the football gods will smile on them. Half the supporters are looking for a sacrifice as well. The attitude is ... if we sacrifice "Player X' then players A,B & C will improve.

For the current coach the sacrifice was Tuck. For your last coach it was Bowden.

The problem is it doesn't work and when a player like Tuck refuses to go along with the plan you can sense the agitation is causes.

It's very fortunate for Richmond that Tuck didn't just throw in the towel like a lot of others would have.

The thing is the culture of a club comes from the administration not the coach.

Why have I entered into the debate ? I just despise pagan attitudes. The positive is that these attitudes can be changed. Things are looking good for Richmond right now but do Richmond supporters (and for that matter Melbourne & Fremantle supporters) get a feeling that there is something not quite right with their clubs but can't put their finger on it ? I would be surprised if they didn't.

Just as a side issue. Norm Smith the coach of Melbourne, at the very end of his coaching career, actually told people that something seriously wrong with the club and they would never be any good again. He didn't know what it was but it's turned out to be true.

I would actually like Richmond to do well but like a couple of other clubs need to change their culture.

IMO

What an utter garbage post your one weird dude.

 

[Bazzar]

What an utter garbage post your one weird dude.

What he is probably trying to say is Tucky is a Proddy and thats why he wasnt getting a game when Dimma took over.

 

[rammbo]

What he is probably trying to say is Tucky is a Proddy and thats why he wasnt getting a game when Dimma took over.

Well im glad thats cleared up now always wondered why tuck was victimised .
cheers baz.

 

[tugga]

Guys, please play the ball and not the man.

 

[CamTinley]

No, I asked a question and got a detailed response. This topic is on it's 2nd thread which means around 1200 posts. It's been a good discussion point.
Thanks for the response CT. I don't necessarily agree with it, but thanks. I think club culture is what certain people make of it at the time. Geelong's culture 10 years ago was losing grand finals and being known as handbaggers. Fast forward and the culture is as strong as any club in the comp. I think culture rests with the leaders a club has at the time.

That's exactly my point.

Brian Cook was CEO at West Coast from 1990 -1999 (2 Premierships; 3 Grand Finals)

Then he went to Geelong 1999 - current (3 Premierships; 4 Grand Finals)

He was a big part of developing the culture as you would expect. He was in charge.

 

[Livonski]

I'll pretend that was a gag Cam because otherwise it borders on religious villification. Aren't the Dees all descendants from Grammar, old boy? Hardly Catholic, what?

Maybe use a little "c" when describing catholic, or protestant ethics for that matter. Better still, when studying nations, states and sporting groups I suggest you don't name their culture after a religion.
Some people actually really do care if you put a negative slant on their religion. And it was a good idea for you to steer clear of hindus, buddhists and muslims.

 

[TOOs_Finest]

I'll pretend that was a gag Cam because otherwise it borders on religious villification. Aren't the Dees all descendants from Grammar, old boy? Hardly Catholic, what?

Maybe use a little "c" when describing catholic, or protestant ethics for that matter. Better still, when studying nations, states and sporting groups I suggest you don't name their culture after a religion.
Some people actually really do care if you put a negative slant on their religion. And it was a good idea for you to steer clear of hindus, buddhists and muslims.

Interesting that CamTinley hasn't mentioned any of this kind of stuff in any thread on either the Freo board or the Religion board. Seeing as he is so passionate about it and all

 

[CamTinley]

Interesting that CamTinley hasn't mentioned any of this kind of stuff in any thread on either the Freo board or the Religion board. Seeing as he is so passionate about it and all

I've mentioned on the Fremantle board that they have to get away from favoring Catholics.

Why would I talk about the victimization of Shane Tuck on the Religion Board anyway ?

I wouldn't have even raised those issues on this board if I wasn't asked to explain my reasons for being involved in a Shane Tuck discussion by one of your Moderators.

If you don't think I'm right about any of what I've said that's up to you.

 

[tugga]

I've mentioned on the Fremantle board that they have to get away from favoring Catholics.

Why would I talk about the victimization of Shane Tuck on the Religion Board anyway ?

I wouldn't have even raised those issues on this board if I wasn't asked to explain my reasons for being involved in a Shane Tuck discussion by one of your Moderators.

If you don't think I'm right about any of what I've said that's up to you.

I asked you because i was interested in your opinion. I asked you as a poster, not in my capacity as a mod.

 

[CamTinley]

I asked you because i was interested in your opinion. I asked you as a poster, not in my capacity as a mod.

Fair enough

 

[T4P]

I've answered this before. I study a wide range of issues but mostly religion and culture. When I look at any group whether it is a state, nation or sporting club there is a certain culture that pervades it.

I am a Fremantle supporter but Fremantle will never be be any good because it has a Catholic culture and that will be hard to get rid of. The other club with a Catholic culture is Melbourne. Look at the number of coaches and CEO's just seamlessly move between those two clubs.

A Catholic culture means jobs for the boys and you'll get looked after as long as your Catholic. That promotes laziness and reduces the talent you have to work with. Fremantle actually choose coaches, captains, CEO's, number one ticket holders and Presidents with a "major requirement" being that they are Catholic. (I'm not sure about Lyon to be honest)

Other clubs have a Protestant ethic like Hawthorn, West Coast, Geelong, Adelaide.

Richmond's culture is Pagan. That might sound ridiculous but that is how I see it.

The first thing a coach does is pick out a sacrifice to make to the football gods, the better the player the more they hope that the football gods will smile on them. Half the supporters are looking for a sacrifice as well. The attitude is ... if we sacrifice "Player X' then players A,B & C will improve.

For the current coach the sacrifice was Tuck. For your last coach it was Bowden.

The problem is it doesn't work and when a player like Tuck refuses to go along with the plan you can sense the agitation is causes.

It's very fortunate for Richmond that Tuck didn't just throw in the towel like a lot of others would have.

The thing is the culture of a club comes from the administration not the coach.

Why have I entered into the debate ? I just despise pagan attitudes. The positive is that these attitudes can be changed. Things are looking good for Richmond right now but do Richmond supporters (and for that matter Melbourne & Fremantle supporters) get a feeling that there is something not quite right with their clubs but can't put their finger on it ? I would be surprised if they didn't.

Just as a side issue. Norm Smith the coach of Melbourne, at the very end of his coaching career, actually told people that something seriously wrong with the club and they would never be any good again. He didn't know what it was but it's turned out to be true.

I would actually like Richmond to do well but like a couple of other clubs need to change their culture.

IMO

I see your point, but I think you're getting it wrong.
The culture of a particular religion can be applied to most organisations whether the religion is present or not. In the football world, I think you'll find theories on leadership in business much more appropriate, whilst applying the same qualities.
For example, this 'Catholic culture' is very similar to autocratic leadership, which means the decision-making is made by very few people with a lot of power. In the footballing world this creates unrest as it is contradictory to the whole 'team' ethos which is essential in footy.
Notice those clubs you listed as 'protestant', they all have coaches who are in for the long term for a long period of time. These are clubs that are settled.

This 'pagan culture' is a load of crap, especially now. For now, we're a settled club in terms of off-field drama. The whole idea of "sacrificing a player for others' improvement" is wrong, it's not done. A gap is created when a player leaves, whether it is filled or not has nothing to do with the player leaving, rendering the word 'sacrifice' inappropriate.
The 'sacrifice' terminology would apply in a different situation. For example: if we had "sacrificed" Richo earlier, Jay Schulz would probably still be at Richmond doing what he's doing at Port. But as Richo stayed, Schulz was never given a solid position, forced to play anywhere and everywhere, and thus his development here was 'sacrificed'. 'Sacrifice' depends on the situation, it is not apart of the culture of a club.

On another note, these connotations about religion don't come from me, I'm just going by the previous post.

 

[El Tigre]

Its taken an interesting turn, this thread....

So over simplising the arguement
So Catholics are lazy
Richmond is from the dark ages and stands no chance for real development
And only Hawthorn, West Coast, Geelong and Adelaide have the right base?

And i think that pretty well every club bar West Coast and Essendon think there is something not quite with their club. Its called not winning every game, and having the significant scope for improval.

But i agree with you about Freo and Melbourne.

If Tuck was sacrificed, what were Morton, Nason, Farmer, Thomson, Tambling etc done?

 

[Livonski]

I've answered this before. I study a wide range of issues but mostly religion and culture. When I look at any group whether it is a state, nation or sporting club there is a certain culture that pervades it.

I am a Fremantle supporter but Fremantle will never be be any good because it has a Catholic culture and that will be hard to get rid of. The other club with a Catholic culture is Melbourne. Look at the number of coaches and CEO's just seamlessly move between those two clubs.

A Catholic culture means jobs for the boys and you'll get looked after as long as your Catholic. That promotes laziness and reduces the talent you have to work with. Fremantle actually choose coaches, captains, CEO's, number one ticket holders and Presidents with a "major requirement" being that they are Catholic. (I'm not sure about Lyon to be honest)

Other clubs have a Protestant ethic like Hawthorn, West Coast, Geelong, Adelaide.

Richmond's culture is Pagan. That might sound ridiculous but that is how I see it.

The first thing a coach does is pick out a sacrifice to make to the football gods, the better the player the more they hope that the football gods will smile on them. Half the supporters are looking for a sacrifice as well. The attitude is ... if we sacrifice "Player X' then players A,B & C will improve.

For the current coach the sacrifice was Tuck. For your last coach it was Bowden.

The problem is it doesn't work and when a player like Tuck refuses to go along with the plan you can sense the agitation is causes.

It's very fortunate for Richmond that Tuck didn't just throw in the towel like a lot of others would have.

The thing is the culture of a club comes from the administration not the coach.

Why have I entered into the debate ? I just despise pagan attitudes. The positive is that these attitudes can be changed. Things are looking good for Richmond right now but do Richmond supporters (and for that matter Melbourne & Fremantle supporters) get a feeling that there is something not quite right with their clubs but can't put their finger on it ? I would be surprised if they didn't.

Just as a side issue. Norm Smith the coach of Melbourne, at the very end of his coaching career, actually told people that something seriously wrong with the club and they would never be any good again. He didn't know what it was but it's turned out to be true.

I would actually like Richmond to do well but like a couple of other clubs need to change their culture.

IMO

I just re read this and realise I was far too diplomatic last time.

I am offended by this post.

Is it just me?

I shouldn't have to illustrate it this way but...

replace Catholic with Aboriginal and see how far you would get, you moron.

 

[CamTinley]

I just re read this and realise I was far too diplomatic last time.

I am offended by this post.

Is it just me?

Replace Catholic with Aboriginal and see how you would get, you moron.

I'm talking about Catholic with a Capital "C" not a lower case "c" in reference to the Fremantle Football Club. I'm speaking literally.

Everyone associated with the Fremantle Football Club in any senior position has been a Catholic. I haven't looked into it recently but it has been up until the last three years.

The Catholic Church themselves has described the Collingwood, North Melbourne and Essendon Football Clubs at various stages as Catholic football clubs ... in writing (not recently but they certainly have in the past)

Catholics look after other Catholics. Do you disagree with that ? I'm not saying that Catholics are intrinsically lazy it's just that they get cut slack by other Catholics.

When I describe other clubs as Protestant I mean non-Catholic.

Look at soccer ... Rangers are protestant ... Celtic are catholic ... are you going to disagree with that ?

The fans know that and the administrators know that. re Celtic & Rangers

The issue is that religion isn't a big part of Australian life and so Australians don't see it at work.

I'm not picking a fight with Catholics and didn't mean to offend anyone and I'm sorry if I did. I'm just making an observation. I still support Fremantle despite the motivations for the decisions they have made.

 

[Equus]

I think this thread has been derailed.

 

[_Wang_]

I think this thread has been derailed.

Yeah correct wtf is this shit

 

[tugga]

Everyone has had their say.
Thread is about Shane Tuck.
Let's get it back on track.
Please don't make me delete and edit posts from now on. I don't want to, but I will if that's what it takes.

 

[T4P]

Tucky's a star.

 

[Harmichael]

I dont' remember Pagan coaching Richmond.